{"title":"外国/世界文学:名词定义问题","authors":"Kateryna Kalynych","doi":"10.31861/pytlit2022.106.165","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The terminological load of the phrase “foreign / world literature” is outlined. The attention is focused on the semantic, cultural-historical, epistemological features of this concept. Literature as a verbal art, being formed since the time of oral folk creativity, reflects the corresponding established canon in the national expression, accordingly, the dynamics of the world literary process. It is emphasized that the development of national literatures had strengthened the nature of explicit-implicit literary relationships. It contributed to the formation of new genres, artistic tastes, as well as to the expansion of the recipient`s worldview, and, accordingly, literary concepts. Controversial interpretations of Goethe’s term “Weltliteratur” are considered: supporters who perceived literature as one general world synthesis (F. Moretti) and scientists who predicted the collapse of the views of the German classics (E. Auerbach). The scientific discourse of the 20th century is assumed. Diverse interpretations of the “world literature” paradigm is understood as a collection of all works from antiquity to modern times; an anthology of the best literary texts (a kind of canonization); as a high-quality cultural and intellectual mutual enrichment. The significant contribution to the formation of the “world / foreign literature” paradigm of comparative studies and sociocultural research is emphasized (the works of P. Sorokin, O. Biletsky, L. Gumilyov, G. Gachev, D. Dyuryshin, A. Volkov of the Chernivtsi TPI School). Outlining the term world / foreign literature in the general literary process, the modern concepts of Western literary critics (E. Auerbach, P. Casanova, K. Prado and T. Samuayo, F. Moretti, D. Damrosch, R. Thomsen, J. David, N. Esenlilioglu, S. Uhliga and C. Zhang) are assumed. It is concluded that the diversity of the interpretation of the term “world / universal / foreign” literature directly depends on the historical, cultural and epistemological approaches to considering this issue; however, for all researchers there are common criteria for the nominative definition of the given paradigm – comprehensiveness, canons of a certain method, anthropological value, and participation in globalization processes.","PeriodicalId":32028,"journal":{"name":"Pitanna Literaturoznavstva","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-12-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Foreign / World Literature: The Problem of Nominative Definition\",\"authors\":\"Kateryna Kalynych\",\"doi\":\"10.31861/pytlit2022.106.165\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"The terminological load of the phrase “foreign / world literature” is outlined. The attention is focused on the semantic, cultural-historical, epistemological features of this concept. Literature as a verbal art, being formed since the time of oral folk creativity, reflects the corresponding established canon in the national expression, accordingly, the dynamics of the world literary process. It is emphasized that the development of national literatures had strengthened the nature of explicit-implicit literary relationships. It contributed to the formation of new genres, artistic tastes, as well as to the expansion of the recipient`s worldview, and, accordingly, literary concepts. Controversial interpretations of Goethe’s term “Weltliteratur” are considered: supporters who perceived literature as one general world synthesis (F. Moretti) and scientists who predicted the collapse of the views of the German classics (E. Auerbach). The scientific discourse of the 20th century is assumed. Diverse interpretations of the “world literature” paradigm is understood as a collection of all works from antiquity to modern times; an anthology of the best literary texts (a kind of canonization); as a high-quality cultural and intellectual mutual enrichment. The significant contribution to the formation of the “world / foreign literature” paradigm of comparative studies and sociocultural research is emphasized (the works of P. Sorokin, O. Biletsky, L. Gumilyov, G. Gachev, D. Dyuryshin, A. Volkov of the Chernivtsi TPI School). Outlining the term world / foreign literature in the general literary process, the modern concepts of Western literary critics (E. Auerbach, P. Casanova, K. Prado and T. Samuayo, F. Moretti, D. Damrosch, R. Thomsen, J. David, N. Esenlilioglu, S. Uhliga and C. Zhang) are assumed. It is concluded that the diversity of the interpretation of the term “world / universal / foreign” literature directly depends on the historical, cultural and epistemological approaches to considering this issue; however, for all researchers there are common criteria for the nominative definition of the given paradigm – comprehensiveness, canons of a certain method, anthropological value, and participation in globalization processes.\",\"PeriodicalId\":32028,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Pitanna Literaturoznavstva\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-12-30\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Pitanna Literaturoznavstva\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.31861/pytlit2022.106.165\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Pitanna Literaturoznavstva","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.31861/pytlit2022.106.165","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
概述了“外国/世界文学”一词的术语负荷。我们的注意力集中在这个概念的语义、文化历史和认识论特征上。文学作为一种语言艺术,自民间口头创作时代形成以来,反映了民族表达中相应的既定规范,从而反映了世界文学进程的动态。强调民族文学的发展强化了显性-隐性文学关系的本质。它有助于形成新的体裁和艺术品味,也有助于扩大接受者的世界观,从而扩大文学观念。对歌德的“世界文学”一词有争议的解释被认为是:认为文学是一个普遍的世界综合的支持者(F.莫雷蒂)和预测德国经典观点崩溃的科学家(E.奥尔巴赫)。假定20世纪的科学论述。对“世界文学”范式的不同解释被理解为从古到今的所有作品的集合;最好的文学文本选集(一种册封);作为高质量的文化和智力相互丰富。强调了对比较研究和社会文化研究的“世界/外国文学”范式形成的重要贡献(P. Sorokin, O. Biletsky, L. Gumilyov, G. Gachev, D. Dyuryshin, A. Volkov的Chernivtsi TPI学派的作品)。概述一般文学过程中的“世界/外国文学”一词,假设西方文学评论家(E. Auerbach, P. Casanova, K. Prado和T. Samuayo, F. Moretti, D. Damrosch, R. Thomsen, J. David, N. Esenlilioglu, S. Uhliga和C. Zhang)的现代概念。对“世界/普遍/外来”文学解释的多样性直接取决于考虑这一问题的历史、文化和认识论方法;然而,对于所有研究者来说,对于给定范式的命名定义有共同的标准——综合性、某种方法的规范、人类学价值和对全球化进程的参与。
Foreign / World Literature: The Problem of Nominative Definition
The terminological load of the phrase “foreign / world literature” is outlined. The attention is focused on the semantic, cultural-historical, epistemological features of this concept. Literature as a verbal art, being formed since the time of oral folk creativity, reflects the corresponding established canon in the national expression, accordingly, the dynamics of the world literary process. It is emphasized that the development of national literatures had strengthened the nature of explicit-implicit literary relationships. It contributed to the formation of new genres, artistic tastes, as well as to the expansion of the recipient`s worldview, and, accordingly, literary concepts. Controversial interpretations of Goethe’s term “Weltliteratur” are considered: supporters who perceived literature as one general world synthesis (F. Moretti) and scientists who predicted the collapse of the views of the German classics (E. Auerbach). The scientific discourse of the 20th century is assumed. Diverse interpretations of the “world literature” paradigm is understood as a collection of all works from antiquity to modern times; an anthology of the best literary texts (a kind of canonization); as a high-quality cultural and intellectual mutual enrichment. The significant contribution to the formation of the “world / foreign literature” paradigm of comparative studies and sociocultural research is emphasized (the works of P. Sorokin, O. Biletsky, L. Gumilyov, G. Gachev, D. Dyuryshin, A. Volkov of the Chernivtsi TPI School). Outlining the term world / foreign literature in the general literary process, the modern concepts of Western literary critics (E. Auerbach, P. Casanova, K. Prado and T. Samuayo, F. Moretti, D. Damrosch, R. Thomsen, J. David, N. Esenlilioglu, S. Uhliga and C. Zhang) are assumed. It is concluded that the diversity of the interpretation of the term “world / universal / foreign” literature directly depends on the historical, cultural and epistemological approaches to considering this issue; however, for all researchers there are common criteria for the nominative definition of the given paradigm – comprehensiveness, canons of a certain method, anthropological value, and participation in globalization processes.